Athlon II X4 640 vs Phenom II X4 925

Athlon II X4 640 vs Phenom II X4 925 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 640

4 / 4

2,266

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Phenom II X4 925

4 / 4

2,261

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Athlon II X4 640 vs Phenom II X4 925 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Athlon II X4 640 vs Phenom II X4 925: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon II X4 640

2010

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Phenom II X4 925.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $80 MSRP, while Phenom II X4 925 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Phenom II X4 925

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon II X4 640 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,261 vs 2,266).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X4 640.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X4 640 better than Phenom II X4 925?

Yes. Athlon II X4 640 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon II X4 640 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X4 640 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Athlon II X4 640 is the better buy right now. Athlon II X4 640 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $80 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (28.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Athlon II X4 640 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X4 640 vs Phenom II X4 925 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Athlon II X4 640

The Athlon II X4 640 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,266 points. Launch price was $80.

Phenom II X4 925

The Phenom II X4 925 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Deneb (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,261 points. Launch price was $160.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X4 640 and Phenom II X4 925 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Athlon II X4 640 versus 2.8 GHz on the Phenom II X4 925 — a 6.9% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 640 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Athlon II X4 640 uses the Propus (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Phenom II X4 925 uses Deneb (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 640 scores 2,266 against the Phenom II X4 925's 2,261 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon II X4 640. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 640 vs 6 MB (total) on the Phenom II X4 925.

Feature	Athlon II X4 640	Phenom II X4 925
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3 GHz+7%	2.8 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+7%	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Propus (2009−2011)	Deneb (2009−2011)
PassMark	2,266	2,261
Cinebench R23 Multi	1,471	—
Geekbench 6 Single	386	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,332	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the AM3 socket with PCIe 2.0.

Feature	Athlon II X4 640	Phenom II X4 925
Socket	AM3	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (Athlon II X4 640) / not specified (Phenom II X4 925). Primary use case: Athlon II X4 640 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X4 640 rivals Core 2 Quad Q8300.